More Schism in the Anglican Communion

On a more controversial note, I have some opinions regarding the recent confirmed election of Rev. Gene Robinson by the Bishops of the Episcopalian Church.

I've been following this story for quite some time now. For me, it was never so much about Gene Robinson, the man. I've never met him. It wasn't even so much about Gene Robinson, the man with a homosexual orientation, since in my opinion that doesn't necessarily provide an impediment to living a healthy, chaste, Christian life. Rather, it was about Gene Robinson, the man who openly endorses extra-marital sexual activity, even instrinsically disordered sexual activity, opposed to natural law, such as sodomy. In a world that is in dire need of strong Christian leaders, consider what a blow this is to Christian morality. In confirming Gene Robinson as Bishop, the Episcopal Church has blessed the desecration of the marital state by saying that it is okay for a Christian leader to engage in homosexual intercourse outside of marriage. It seems to me that implicit in this is blanket blessing of sexual intercourse outside of the marital state, homosexual or heterosexual, for any Episcopalian. Is this not true? How do the Episcopalian Bishops justify this to their flock? By arguing that pre-marital and extra-marital sexual intercourse is okay as long as there is love, or fidelity, and that sex doesn't really need to have anything to do with being married at all? What message do you think this sends to youth?

It is of no surprise to me that the Anglican/Episcopalian Church is teetering on the edge of more division amongst itself.

What a contrast this is to the beautiful, life-affirming sacramental definition of sexual intercourse within the blessed union of Holy Matrimony as the Catholic Church has consistently tried to convey. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has taken a lot of heat for releasing its new document, CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING PROPOSALS TO GIVE LEGAL RECOGNITION TO UNIONS BETWEEN HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS, particularly from the secular press. So basically, in recent days we have had two major statements from two major Christian communions. One stands up for the teachings of Christ and natural law, while the other is a complete compromise on those teachings to suit the world's good feelings. One is difficult to accept because it challenges us to live our lives for Christ, while the other is easy to accept because it says its okay to live our lives for ourselves.